The Third Time Isn’t the Charm

Today, the Tax Court looked at the case of a man who had appeared before the court twice previously. In 2001, “the Court explained to petitioner that taxable income includes money and other goods received in exchange for services and urged petitioner to file returns.” In 2005, he returned to the Court: “[T]he Court again rejected petitioner’s arguments and awarded the United States a penalty pursuant to section 6673 in the amount of $5,000. Leggett v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-185.” In this case, the petitioner didn’t file a 2002 tax return but had income from installing air conditioners and from Social Security. Would the third time be the charm?

Hardly.

“The Court shall not further address petitioner’s repeated argument “with somber reasoning and copious citation of precedent; to do so might suggest that these arguments have some colorable merit.” Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417, 1417 (5th Cir. 1984). Therefore, the Court sustains respondent’s determination of petitioner’s 2002 tax deficiency.”

To rub a little salt in his wounds, the petitioner also get penalized three times; a Section 6651(a)(1) penalty for failure to file a return (5% per month up to a 25% penalty); a Section 6654(a) penalty for failure to pay estimated taxes; and a Section 6673(a)(1) penalty for “proceedings instituted primarily for delay or in which the taxpayer’s position is frivolous or groundless. “A petition to the Tax Court, or a tax return, is frivolous if it is contrary to established law and unsupported by a reasoned, colorable argument for change in the law.” Coleman v. Commissioner, 791 F.2d 68, 71 (7th Cir. 1986).”

Actually, the petitioner got lucky. In 2005, the Court gave him a $5,000 penalty. In 2006, he gets $6,000. I suspect that if he has another case in 2007, he’ll get $7,000.

Case: Leggett v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 2006-253

Comments are closed.